The 2000 NPT Review Conference (RevCon)
14 April - 19 May 2000, New York

   Speech by
State Secretary Wolfgang Ischinger
Federal Foreign Office 

at the 2000 Review Conference of the State Parties
to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons

  New York, 24 April 2000

  This Review Conference of the States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is the first multilateral conference to be held in the year 2000 on non­proliferation and disarmament. The Conference addresses an issue of cardinal importance for the future of humanity in the 21st century: curbing the threat posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and of nuclear weapons in particular. 

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is the cornerstone of the inter­national nuclear non-proliferation regime, the foundation of Germany's nuclear non­proliferation policy as well as the binding legal basis for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament. 

Over the past 30 years the Non-Proliferation Treaty has become one of the most valuable instruments of cooperative security, it has played a key role in safeguarding international peace and continues to do so This Conference will serve, I believe, also as an important indicator of whether in the 21st century cooperative security policy will continue to play a key role in international efforts to safeguard peace. 

With 187 States Parties the Non-Proliferation Treaty has virtually universal support, more than any comparable document apart from the Charter of the United Nations. It is important to recall that this was not always the case. In the early 60s President John F. Kennedy feared the number of nuclear-weapon states might rise to 15 or 20 by the mid-70s. This was prevented by the conclusion of the Non-Proliferation Treaty - a realistic response to the nuclear challenge. 

We must be aware, however, that the Non-Proliferation Treaty strikes a difficult balance. Unlike other conventions banning weapons of mass destruction, it does not prohibit nuclear weapons as such but only their- proliferation. At the same time it commits the five recognized nuclear-weapon states at the time of the Treaty's entry into force to pursue negotiations on ending the nuclear arms race and nuclear disarmament, it further commits all States Parties to general and complete disarmament on the basis of strict and effective international control. 

The indefinite extension of the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1995 brought also further clarifi­cation of the obligation of the nuclear-weapon states: the determined pursuit of systematic and progressive efforts to reduce nuclear weapons globally, with the ultimate goal of eliminating those weapons. 

Nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament are contingent on each other: without progress on nuclear disarmament, the proliferation of nuclear weapons cannot be effectively prevented in the long term. 

The 1995 Review and Extension Conference, in particular the indefinite extension of the Treaty, was for the whole international community a remarkable achievement and it still is. We attach great importance to all four documents adopted in 1995 by consensus of the States Parties: the indefinite extension, the decisions on strengthening the review process and on principles and objectives for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament as well as the resolution on the Middle East together with the Treaty itself, they constitute the solid, indispensable basis for the work ahead. 

The sixth Review Conference on the Non-Proliferation Treaty has for a number of reasons special significance: 

It is the first to take place following the indefinite extension of the Treaty. All States Parties must demonstrate their commitment to honour the undertakings under the Treaty, including those entered into when it was extended. We will honour ours. 

The tasks we face are clearly defined in the decision on strengthening the review process adopted in 1995: firstly, to evaluate the results achieved since 1995; secondly, to identify areas in which and the means through which further progress should be sought in future Review conferences should consider specifically what might be done to strengthen implementation of the Treaty and to achieve its universality. 

In 1995 the States Parties agreed on principles and objectives for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, including a programme of action. Developments over the past five years as well as future nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament tasks will therefore need to be evaluated on the basis of those principles and objectives. 

A sober assessment of progress on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament since 1995 yields a mixed picture - some light but a good deal of shade as well. I will confine myself here to a few brief comments Since 1995 a further 9 countries - Andorra, Angola, Brazil, Chile, the Comoros, Djibouti, Oman, the United Arab Emirates and Vanuatu have acceded to the Non­-Proliferation Treaty. That is a notable success, since it means entire continents and regions now adhere to the Treaty. 

But there are four countries that continue to stand aloof at a distance. We must spare no effort to achieve step by step the adherence also of these four countries to the Treaty. Universality remains one of the foremost goals. The test explosions carried out ill South Asia in May 1998 seriously strain the nuclear non-proliferation regime. Despite international criticism the countries concerned continue with their nuclear weapon program. Nuclear build up and working towards the ultimate goal of a nuclear weapon free world are incompatible. Can the Treaty meet this challenge? We believe: there is no alternative to the Treaty. For precisely that reason - but also and especially due to the increasingly obvious danger, given the rapid development of military medium and long-range missile technology, of proliferating nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction - there is an urgent need to strengthen the non-proliferation regime and the Non-Proliferation Treaty as the corner-stone of that regime. 

In this context I would draw attention to the obligation of all States Parties under the Treaty to adopt and ratify safeguards agreements. I appeal moreover to all countries to adopt safeguards under the Additional Protocol so as to enable the International Atomic Energy Agency to identify any illegal nuclear activities more promptly and efficiently. 

The way in which the principles and objectives for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament agreed in 1995 have been implemented is anything but satisfactory. While negotiations on a Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty were completed in 1996, its entry into force is still a long way off. It is imperative it do so, however, there is no other choice. My country believes this is of crucial importance. We therefore strongly welcome the approval of the CTBT on 21 April by the Duma of the Russian Federation. Equally important is the opening of long­ overdue negotiations hi the Conference on Disarmament on banning the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons and other nuclear explosive devices. The negotiating mandate drawn up in 1995 must not be called into question nor must any country further delay the early commencement of negotiations. Objective requirements must not be subordinated to tactical considerations. 

It is essential to resolve the present deadlock at the Geneva Conference on Disarmament if this important institution is not to be undermined. We sincerely hope the Review Conference will be able to send a clear signal that the paralysis currently gripping the Geneva Conference will soon be a thing of the past. 

Nuclear non-proliferation is a difficult, step-by-step process requiring not only reductions in existing arsenals but also ongoing changes in the security structures built during the Cold War era around possession of massive quantities of such weapons. The Adapted Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) provides the basis for long-term stability in Europe. That is crucial if further progress also on nuclear disarmament is to be achieved. The bilateral process of nuclear disarmament initiated by START I must now be vigorously pursued. I therefore particularly welcome Russia's recent ratification of START II and strongly hope this is a sign that formal negotiations on S'TART III are to begin soon. 

Individual nuclear-weapon states have announced and in part already implemented significant unilateral disarmament measures that also relate to two aspects we believe are particularly important, namely, transparency and irreversibility. I hope other nuclear-weapon states will follow suit. 

We commend the progress towards consolidating existing and creating new nuclear-weapon ­free zones Such zones play a valuable part in maintaining regional stability and peace The treaties establishing nuclear-weapon-free zones in Africa and South-East Asia help bolster these efforts, as do efforts to establish a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Central Asia and a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. The concerns expressed by the States Parties in the Resolution on the Middle East adopted in 1995 have lost none of their relevance. 

In 1995 the forward-looking mandate of this sixth as well as subsequent review conferences was strengthened and the dynamic nature of the Non-Proliferation Treaty clearly underlined: the non-proliferation and disarmament tasks of the future, to strengthen implementation of Treaty obligations and make headway towards the goal of universal adherence to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. 

A balanced and comprehensive discussion of all nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament issues is required. Constructive and focused cooperation on the part of all participants is essential if the Conference is to send a positive message that will strengthen nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. 

I consider it highly significant that under the Portuguese Presidency the member states of the European Union have agreed on a common position for this Conference For the first time the EU member states have succeeded, in reaching a consensus - and this I regard as particularly important - on the nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament challenges that lie ahead. That consensus identifies major challenges that none of the participants present today should ignore. It is realistic yet meaningful in substance. 

That sends a powerful signal to the Conference. It shows that the EU member states have risen to the task before us: to strengthen the Non-Proliferation Treaty. To that end Germany has worked long and hard and will continue to do so. 


Back to Official Documents and Statements